International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD)
Volume 5 Issue 1, November-December 2020 Available Online: www.ijtsrd.com e-ISSN: 2456 – 6470
The Church and the State: A Critical Reading of
John Locke’s Theologico-Political Thought
Nde Paul Ade PhD
Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Arts, The University of Bamenda, Bamenda, Cameroon
How to cite this paper: Nde Paul Ade
"The Church and the State: A Critical
Reading of John Locke’s TheologicoPolitical Thought"
Published
in
International Journal
of Trend in Scientific
Research
and
Development (ijtsrd),
ISSN:
2456-6470,
IJTSRD38332
Volume-5 | Issue-1,
December 2020, pp.1588-1592, URL:
www.ijtsrd.com/papers/ijtsrd38332.pdf
ABSTRACT
This paper examines the clear cut separation and distinction of the role and
business of the church and the state. Social disorder, wars and conflicts of
diverse natures have always resulted from the inefficient link between the
church and the state. My focus in this paper is to justify that, without the
establishment of a real boundary between the church and the state, there can
be no certain end to the controversies that will be always arising. This
principle of separation is geared toward the secularization of politics, as a
means of putting the different sectors of the society in their right positions, by
emphasizing on the fact that, the affairs of heaven do not have any business
with those of the earth and restricting the temptation of power abuse by either
the church or the state or both. I emphatically portray that, the church must be
separated from the state exactly and absolutely because it is considered as the
first method to resolve the different problems related to the misuse of power
that usually occur within the society. I further admit that, the church is mainly
concerned about the interests of men’s souls which involve exercising purity,
God worship, living a holy and decent life, aimed at acquiring the salvation of
individual souls. Finally, I conclude that, the aspiration of the state is outward,
external or public and centered on the commonwealth, geared toward the
procuring, preserving and advancing of civil interests which include: life,
liberty, indolence of the body, and the possession of outward things, such as:
money, land, houses, furniture.
Copyright © 2020 by author (s) and
International Journal of Trend in Scientific
Research and Development Journal. This
is an Open Access article distributed
under the terms of
the
Creative
Commons Attribution
License
(CC
BY
4.0)
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
KEYWORDS: Church, State, John Locke, Freedom, Commonwealth, Religion,
Government
INTRODUCTION
The business of the church and the state occupies a central
position in the philosophy of John Locke. This is evident
because, the church and its divine authorization are closely
connected to the idea of tolerance manifested within the
state. There is no doubt that Locke an tolerance unfolds with
the question of the church when he starts by stating that,
toleration is the “chief Characteristical Mark of the true
Church”.2 This opening paragraph of Locke’s Letter
Concerning Toleration echoes the important role to be played
by the church and state as a means to embark on the search
for tolerance. That is the reason why admittedly, in
connection to the value of such a vital role it is clear that, “a
good life” involves religion and piety, but it “concerns also
the civil government”.3 As a result of this assertion, the moral
actions fall under the jurisdictions of both magistrate and
conscience. This creates the danger of one depending on the
other. Therefore, it is of vital importance to distinguish
between these two realms. First of all, the idea that
characterizes the realm of religion is as follows: Every man
has an immortal soul, capable of eternal happiness or misery,
whose happiness depending upon his believing and doing
those things in life, which are necessary to the obtaining of
God’s favor and are prescribed by God to that end: it follows
from thence, first, that the observance of these things is the
highest obligation that lies upon mankind.4
The realm of religion is that of the immortal souls of all
human beings, who strive for salvation by worshipping God.
It is equally considered as the other eternal world, whose
obligations over ride everything else from this visible world
of ours. At most, human beings can try to persuade each
other concerning the truth of a particular doctrine or form of
worship, but “all force and compulsion are to be forborne in
this physical and public or outward realm”.5 In line with the
question of divine authorization, Locke condemns the
reliance on the dictates of divine authorization under the
realm of tolerance which was the order of the day involving
church ministry. To further justify this necessity in
challenging such a dependence on divine authorization when
treating tolerance issues, in my opinion, “Locke’s religious
ideas concur with his finality that consist in making
toleration a more attractive aspect of the state”.6 The
conception of the true church include the fact that, first, a
true church, for him, refers to that which is more concerned
about searching for the salvation of individual souls not
through the means of arming oneself with the sword or any
other instrument of force, but by equipping the public with a
gospel characterized by peace, second, by involving the
2
Locke, J., A Letter Concerning Toleration. In Locke on Toleration,
Edited by Richard Vernon, Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press, 2010, p. 8.
3Ibid.,p. 241.
@ IJTSRD
|
Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD38332
|
Locke, J., Op.Cit., p. 240.
p. 242.
6Ibid.,p. 275.
4
5Ibid.,
Volume – 5 | Issue – 1
|
November-December 2020
Page 1588
International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470
exemplary and holy nature of what their conversation
embodies.
I.
The Character and goals of a True Church
It is important to underscore the fact that, for any true
church to be regarded as such, it must therefore be able to
accomplish its mission, being the salvation of the souls of the
people and the tendency for that church to equally exercise a
real sense of morality, by appealing to the policy of tolerance
which constitutes the “chief Characteristical Mark of a True
Church”. This also means in simpler terms that, when talking
about a true church in the real sense of the term, it is
understood as the one which is geared towards the saving of
individual souls as well as promoting morals of the church,
as the method intended to attain toleration a result of the
simple fact that every true church strives for the salvation of
souls, Locke was convinced beyond every reasonable doubt
that, at last, there is no difference existing between the
“National Church and the other separated Congregations”.7
At this level, even the sects are acknowledged as true
churches, given that they also exercise a sense of morality in
carrying out their duties. Moreover, the manifestations of
immoral acts such as violence and persecution of other
people are contrary to the expectations of true churches
which are supposed to live by the dictates of the gospel, by
basing their actions on the principle of charity, portraying
the purity of the church for the glory of God.8
Consequently, if any church is discovered professing the
opposite, that is, manifesting immorality and indulging in the
persecution of others, that church is automatically going to
earn the title of an untrue church. The emphasis in
determining the true church from the numerous churches
that exists in the societyis intended to attempt resolving
whatever problems that could arise from the establishment
of tolerance within the state. The emphasis by stressing on
the features of a true church as determined by “the outward
Form and the Rites of Worship”, coupled with the “Doctrines
such a church professes, as well as the Articles of Faith”, are
all considerations to booster the point concerning the
essentiality of a true church. This insistence is a vital tool in
the question of toleration.
II.
The Expectations of Ecclesiastical Authorities
In order to clarify the doubts and suspicions that
ecclesiastical authority could bring to the society, Locke
openly and categorically writes that, “Ecclesiastical
Authority, whether it be administered by the Hands of a
Single Person, or many, is everywhere the same”.9 He also
states that, “Every Church is Orthodox to itself; to others,
Erroneous or Heretical”. This is what caused him to attack
the Church of England by preaching the need for the
institution of equal authority of all churches. He still adds
that, the authority of the church was not initially determined
by the government, coercive force, possessions, but they
were visibly expressed through the presence of peace,
morals, virtue, and other things instituted by the moral
voice.10 Locke further enumerates that if any church
proclaims its sole authority or orthodoxy, then, there will be
conflicts as power holders are always corrupted by power
p. 25.
p. 39.
9 Locke, J., Op.cit.,p. 24.
10Ibid., p. 53.
7Ibid.,
8Ibid.,
@ IJTSRD
|
Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD38332
|
absolutely. Rather, all the churches are instead expected to
declare their equality of authority or orthodoxy vis-à-vis the
others.
To be more precise, Locke particularly tells the sects to
affirm their orthodoxy. This reaction towards ecclesiastical
laws as well, went a long way to serve as part and parcel of
the underpinnings characterizing the notion of
tolerance.11The degree of the negativity in face of
ecclesiastical laws was the accusation of the leaders of the
English church for immoral actions. According to the
convictions of the Anglicans, church ministers were
appointed by God and were thus referred to as “the servants
of God”. Hence, such ministers were not regarded as
ordinary persons. To add to the above, they were considered
as “the representatives of God” and also as the “mediators
between God on the one hand and the people of God on the
other hand”, as explained by Cornwall.12 In Locke an
perspectives, the minister of the church is referred by him as
“a minister of the Word of God, a Preacher of the Gospel of
Peace” and equally termed as one who must do everything
necessary in order to avoid practices of “Violence and
Rapine, as well as all manner of Persecution”.13 As a means to
disprove the belief that ministers of God are actually God’s
representatives, Locke mentions that, instead for some of
these ministers to preach a gospel of peace to the people, on
the contrary, they preached and even practiced violence
especially through the wrong method.
It was for the above reasons that Locke addressed the people
of England with the message that it was actually
unreasonable and needless to be insisting that there should
be a uniformity of worship. This message was for the simple
reason that the adoption of obligation is not the real manner
of producing a true church, so, it is consequently invalid. The
above renders Locke’s arguments two folded, corresponding
to two categories of people.14On the one hand, it serves as a
warning to the people of England. On the other hand, he
addresses those belonging to the sects to give away their
rights of worship and that they should begin practicing
beliefs which are acceptable as a means to please God. Here,
the reasonable stance for toleration stems from the activities
of every true church. Although the church of England was
not characterized by freedom of worship, Locke strongly
held the view that the church remains “a free and voluntary
society”.15 By free and voluntary, Locke means that the
people enter such a society and become members of the
society through their own free individual wills, depending on
the convictions of their personal judgments in relation to
their knowledge about the form of faith and religious
worship that is pleasing to God.16 Worthy of note is that, the
Locke an proposal of attempting to render church
membership free and open was not welcomed by the
Anglicans of the seventeenth century. What impression then,
did these Anglicans have in mind for denying this Locke an
proposal? Again, what answer did Locke advance to clarify
his assertion? These Anglicans denied such an idea because
p. 23.
pp. 53, 30.
13 Cornwall, R., Visible and Apostolic: The Constitution of the Church
in High Anglican Church and Non-juror Thought. In Newark,
Delaware, University of Delaware Press, 1993, p.11.
14 Locke, J., Op.Cit., pp. 33-34.
15Ibid., pp. 28, 31, 39.
16Ibid., p. 28.
11Ibid.,
12Ibid.,
Volume – 5 | Issue – 1
|
November-December 2020
Page 1589
International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470
they regarded it as radical in the sense that, it did not only
insist on the free participation of the individual in worship,
but was equally viewed as an intention to break the
collective links enjoyed by people of the same family as well
as towards that of the local parish. The quick response to this
Anglican complains is the fact that, the act of attempting or
deciding to belong to a particular church is not a collective
obligation but an individual decision to take.
The coercion of belief by either the government or certain
categories of people exercising some degree of power is
therefore totally wrong and unreasonable as it will yield no
fruits. Hence, the ministry of the church as a prescription of
divine authorization was equally deemed as a crucial issue of
importance to the theory of toleration. This issue of church
and divine authorization is evident from the evocation of
aspects like public worship, persecution, and also the
definition of the concept of orthodoxy. Furthermore, another
evidence of the crucial nature of this church ministry is the
fact that, Locke himself never abandoned the church of
England and also admired the various levels or ranks that
characterized the English church. In establishing the identity
of the traditional church, Locke did not base his knowledge
on the group knowledge of that time but was more focused
on the features of a true church.
For these reasons seen, the coinage “ministry” as used in the
English church during the seventeenth and eighteenth
century England, was referred to as “divine authorization”.
To further justify this usage of the above expression, Robert
Cornwall writes: “Ministry was not only an earthly system it
was also a reflection of the heavenly order”.17 In this sense,
the idea of ministry was actually characterized by hierarchy,
ordination and limitation to particular and special persons.
Even the clerics were on their part deriving their authority
from succession. On the contrary, Locke develops a different
claim to the one advanced by Cornwall in that, for Locke,
every church possess an equal authority just as the other
existing churches. He remarks in relation to this equality in
terms of authority by stating that, “a bishop, or Presbyter,
with Ruling Authority” through a system of apostolic
succession is not the required prerequisite for a true
church.18
This means that, Christ did not issue any idea concerning
apostolic succession as a commandment to be practiced by
any true church. Again, Christ instead placed a true church in
his presence and in his name following what is written in the
Holy Bible, precisely in Matthew 18:20.19 From a clear
implication of this biblical quotation, since Christ did not in
any way prescribe the succession of apostles, Locke was
therefore confidant in concluding that a true church is
determined by the scripture of Christ according to the Bible.
For this reason, Locke propounds a system of “Ecclesiastical
Liberty” which goes hand in glove with the saving of a
person’s soul determined by the impression one has
concerning the idea of a true church.20
The church in this aforementioned context of using power or
the sword or persuasive means to push individuals to error
Locke, J., Ibid., p. 29.
Cornwall, R., Op.Cit., p. 105.
19 Locke, J., Op.cit., pp. 97, 98.
20 Locke, J., Ibid., p. 29.
18
|
Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD38332
Although the act of choosing a church is termed as
ecclesiastical liberty, it contains liberal and radical aspects.
But the added advantage brought by this conception is the
fact that it is reserved for every human being and equally
opposed to the idea of “ecclesiastical authority”. By insisting
on the universalization of his idea of ecclesiastical liberty
especially within the context of the government of England
and the church of England, Locke was indirectly passing the
message that, ecclesiastical liberty constitutes a necessary
ingredient for the identification of a true church. This means
that Locke’s own version of a true church is the one which
relies in the freedom of the individual and not the one based
on an authority or depended on tradition. So, even a person’s
freedom as an individual contributes in rendering a true
church the way it should be. If there exists ecclesiastical
laws, then there should be precautions in their promulgation
because, those laws may sometimes be geared towards the
foundation and justifiability of persecution. For this reason,
Locke advices that such authority or laws should rather be
directed towards church affairs, precisely, towards the
worshipping of God publicly.23 This is why the ecclesiastical
laws must be preoccupied by God worship solely, and not on
properties or the society. Nonetheless, the only case
whereby the adopted of any form of ecclesiastical laws can
become acceptable as civil laws is the case of the
commonwealth system of the Jews which is characterized by
absolute theocracy.
Here, as civil laws are required for the government, so are
the ecclesiastical laws directed to God worship.
Furthermore, Locke equally frowns at the manner in which
most of the church ministers manipulated or intended to
modify the laws established by the monarchy. For instance,
for the case of the clergy, he declared that they “easily and
smoothly” intended to transform their “Decrees, their
articles of faith, form of worship and even form of worship”
as evident with the kings such as Edward VI, Henry VIII,
including queens such as Queen Elizabeth and Mary.24 The
fact that some these aforementioned kings and queens
interfere in the issues concerning worship, faith and even
21 In this chapter and verse of the Gospel according to Saint
Matthew, it is written: “For where two or three are gathered in my
name, there am I in the midst of them”.
22 Locke, J., p. 28.
23Ibid., p. 30.
24 Locke, J.,Op.Cit.,p. 31.
17
@ IJTSRD
is going out of the bounds meant for the mission of churches.
In this light, what arms are the churches expected to bear?
The answer Locke advances to this issue of what is actually
expected from the church’s business are: “Exhortations,
Admonitions and Advices”, which he regards as the “last and
utmost Force of Ecclesiastical Authority of the church”.21The
authority of the church is however based in peace and
enforcement of morality and not geared towards the
realization or manifestation of political power. Again,
according to Locke, even the law or the government never
gave any church the right to the imposition of any type of
religious worship on any individual who refused taking part
in the God worship of a particular church.22 This is so
because, no government as Locke believes, will grant to any
church such a right to manifest that authority. Thus, the
church’s right to use such powers is totally illegitimate and
unacceptable no matter the given situation and reasons
behind that.
|
Volume – 5 | Issue – 1
|
November-December 2020
Page 1590
International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470
decrees is a clear indication that they do not follow what
their conscience tells them to do and also their judgments.25
However, since the behaviors of the clergies are usually
questionable, especially in the category of their morality as
individuals, it consequently presented more problems in
relation to the church. This is the extent to which Locke,
regarded as a “Liberal Latitudinarian” stands in support of
the other Latitudinarians of the seventeenth century due to
their concern and contributions towards the promotion of
ethics, practical and moral behavior, as well as the
facilitation of theology with emphasis on morality.
the minds of individuals to engage in one religion or the
other, or to abandon their religion to profess another simply
because they were punished before to do it. Lastly, no matter
the form of punishment adopted, it cannot ensure the
salvation of individual souls.29In addition to the first two
examined duties of the civil magistrate, he is also supposed
to carry weapons as a means to protect the liberty,
properties, life, not leaving out the reason that it is his duty
to punish those who go against the laws and equally abuse
the human rights of other people.30
IV.
III.
The Business of Civil Authorities
The main concern of the state governed by the civil
magistrate as far as the issue at stake is concerned, is to
concentrate on those who violate the laws in one way or the
other, and also for punishment to be meted on those who
violate others rights. For the afore mentioned purposes,
therefore, any civil magistrate who does not comply and
appeal to the duties cited above, does not merit such a
position and is thereby considered as a violator. The various
roles to be exercised equally include the prevention of the
misuse of power by any of the authorities, be it the religious
or the civil. First of all, which the magistrate is supposed to
secure the people as well as their possessions by executing
equal laws.26That means in essence that, their first role is to
protect the peoples properties and also to protect them
through the law. It is worth noting that, the exercise of
power by the civil magistrate is only acceptable or
considered legal if and only if it does not reach the domain of
faith, souls, including other forms of religious worship. The
next role is to administer punishment to those who violate
the laws as well as the human rights of others. Even though
punishment was to be meted on the violators of the above,
Locke was careful enough in prescribing the form of
punishment to be implemented by the authority in place,
though, the degree of such a punishment is limited. In
relation to this, the response is that, those who deserve to be
punished include those who disturb public peace, those who
violate other people’s rights, those who harm their
neighbors and the commonwealth.27Although those who
violate either the laws or the rights of others are always
experiencing the fear of penalties and punishment to be
levied upon them, moral evil, characterized by lying, stealing,
greed, sins and even idol worshipping is inherent in human
nature and therefore cannot be completely eradicated by the
establishment of punishment.28 In addition to the
incapability of punishment to resolve the problem of those
who violate any of the laws, punishment is equally powerless
in producing various belief systems especially in
determining the true religion, too, it is incapable of changing
p. 30.
p. 44.
27Ibid.,p.38.
28The Latitudinarians such as John Tillotson, Benjamin Whichcote,
John Wilkins, greatly influence Locke’s epistemology as well as his
idea of the church due to Locke’s intimate relationship with them
from the 1650s to the 1680s. In line with the Latitudinarians, Locke
underscored the role reason plays and the prophetic office of Christ
in his An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, including The
Reasonableness of Christianity. For a fuller discussion on that, see
John Marshall, “John Locke and Latitudinarianism”. In Philosophy,
Science, and Religion in England, 1640-1700, R. Kroll ed., Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1992, pp. 273-275; Maurice Cranston,
John Locke: A Biography, New York, Macmillan Company, 1957, pp.
124-128.
25Ibid.,
26Ibid.,
@ IJTSRD
|
Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD38332
|
The conception and form of Punishment as a
Manifestation of Political Power
In relation to what form of punishment to be executed by the
civil magistrate and for what category of people, Locke was
very careful in determining that, since the use of power and
the adoption of penalties are very necessary, he advised that
such use of force, especially armed force must be strictly
restricted by the law and under the dictates of the civil
jurisdiction. After the examination of the role of the use of
punishment by the civil magistrate and the domains
concerned, it is therefore evident that, such a use of penalties
especially on the issues related to the mind of the individual
as well as in religious affairs, is not acceptable to be
considered as part of the duty of the civil magistrate.31As a
means to enforce the relationship between the church and
the state, the most effective means for this to be realized is
by limiting the power existing within the church and that of
the state. The efficiency of this method is seen when Locke
differentiated between the authorities, including the forces
of the state and church, as well as their various rights, as a
strategy to regulate the use of power by both parties. Here,
Locke insisted that all the outward power to be manifested
should be done by the civil magistrate, in accordance with
the laws.32
Political power is referred to as, “a Right of making Laws
with Penalties of Death and consequently all less
Penalties”.33 This theory of punishment is thus central to the
view of politics and part of what is considered innovative in
Locke’s political philosophy. According to this idea,
punishment ends up to be a “very strange doctrine” because,
it ran against the assumption that, only political sovereigns
could punish. Punishment requires that, there should be a
law and since the state of nature has the law of nature to
govern it, it is permissible to describe one individual as
“punishing” another in that state. Locke’s rationale here is
that, since the fundamental law of nature is that mankind is
preserved and since that law would “be in vain” with no
human power to enforce it, it must therefore be legitimate
for individuals to punish each other even before government
exists. It is in arguing this, that the negative form of
punishment is evoked. The concept of punishment made no
sense apart from an established positive legal structure.
Again, the idea of retribution and of punishing only for
reparation and restraint fall under such a category. A survey
of other seventeenth century natural rights justification for
punishment, however, indicates that, it was common to use
29 Spellman, W.M., The Latitudinarians and the Church of England,
1660-1700. Athens and London, The University of Georgia Press,
1993, pp. 7-9.
30 Locke, J., Op.cit., p. 9.
31 Locke, J., Ibid., p. 26.
32Ibid., pp. 43-44.
33Ibid., p. 27.
Volume – 5 | Issue – 1
|
November-December 2020
Page 1591
International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470
words like “retributive,” in theories that reject what we may
call today retributive punishment.
Even though the civil magistrate has power, it is simply the
type of power that can only be manifested under the dictates
and prescriptions of the laws in place. The value of law is
that it is an instrument used to get rid of “fraud and violence”
that are manifested by some people in the society.34 The law
is therefore meant to get rid of such social ills that affect the
community negatively. That notwithstanding, the law is not
simply meant to dispose of those who commit the afore
mentioned crimes, but it equally serves as a necessary
government instrument which can better be implemented by
the various magistrates as an effective strategy, to preserve
the public good, liberty, life, property, as well as to maintain
peace. That explains why political power is geared towards
the outward world and charged with the responsibility to
cater for such matters.
Given that the government does not need to handle issues
connected to religion or beliefs of the people, for the reason
that, such powers to intervene in affairs of faith are not
prescribed by the laws under him, coupled with the
impression that nobody imposes his power on the
government or laws, it is therefore normal that coercion be
regarded as an abuse of power and also as unlawful, given
the circumstances stated. Similar to the “don’ts” in relation
to the abuse of power in the government vis-à-vis the
individual, Locke emphasized that even the church too, does
not have the power of sword “to convince men’s minds of
error” as a means of educating people about the truth in the
meaning as determined by the state.35The reasons why the
government cannot and should not in any way enforce the
worship of God are that, first, the church is regarded as “a
free society”, that is, the place where human freedom
resides. Secondly, the value of worship is connected to the
inward judgments and the conscience of the individual,
which all make worship justifiable. Hence, the civil
magistrate is incapable of coercing any type of religious
practice in any given church.
CONCLUSION
In a nutshell, the crux of the matter in this paper lies in
critically examining the theological and political origins, role
and aspirations of a true church, ecclesiastic authorities,
including the nature, business, and finality of the state. The
cares of a church involve the salvation of individual souls
which is referred to as internal, inward or private, while
insisting on public God worship as he deems necessary to
please God. The state on her part, is charged with the
responsibility of ensuring, protecting, and procuring the life,
liberty, and property of the citizens within her jurisdiction.
This means that, it manifests externally, outwardly and
publicly, since her business is limited to the things of this
earth. In order for these duties and goals of both organs to be
realizable, some advices are prescribed through four
different levels. At the first level, there are Locke’s
theological foundations. Second, there is also the general
principle prescribing that our political principles should all
be ones that we would want others who are fallible and
partial like ourselves to be able to interpret and also apply
them accordingly every time need arises. Third, the specific
principle being that, the magistrate should not tolerate those
beliefs that would be incompatible, with the possibility of
establishing a civil society if widely held.36At the fourth level,
Locke argued against the toleration of Catholicism and
atheism.37
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] Chen, S., “Locke’s Political Arguments for Toleration”,
History of Political Thought, Vol. 2, Number 9, June,
1998.
[2]
Cornwall, R., Visible and Apostolic: The Constitution of
the Church in High Anglican Church and Non-juror
Thought Newark, Delaware, University of Delaware
Press, 1993.
[3]
Cranston, M., John Locke: A Biography, New York,
Macmillan Company, 1957.
[4]
Israelsen, A., “God, Mixed Modes, and Natural Law: An
Intellectualist Interpretation of Locke’s Moral
Philosophy”, in British Journal for the History of
Philosophy, Vol.21, Number 6, June, 2013.
[5]
Jolley, N. “Locke on Faith and Reason” In The
Cambridge Companion to Locke's Essay Concerning
Human Understanding, Edited by Lex Newman,
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2007.
[6]
Kenneth, G., Religious Convictions and Political Choice,
Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1988.
[7]
Locke, J., A Letter Concerning Toleration in Locke on
Toleration, Edited by Richard Vernon, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 2010.
[8]
………, Divine Dialogues, London, More Henry, 1662.
[9]
………, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding,
Edited by Peter H. Nidd itch, Oxford, Clarendon Press,
1975.
[10]
………, the Two Treatises of Government, Edited by
Peter Laslett, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press,
1988.
[11]
………, the Reasonableness of Christianity, Edited by
John C. Higgins-Biddle, Oxford, Clarendon, 1999.
[12]
Marshall, J., “John Locke and Latitudinarianism” In
Philosophy, Science, and Religion in England, 16401700. R. Kroll ed., Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press, 1992.
[13]
Spellman, W. M., the Latitudinarians and the Church of
England, 1660-1700, Athens and London, The
University of Georgia Press, 1993.
[14]
Tuckness, A., “Rethinking the Intolerant Locke”, in
American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 2, Number 4,
April, 2002.
pp. 30,31, 35.
“Rethinking the Intolerant Locke”. American Journal
of Political Science, no. 46, vol. 2, April, 2002, pp. 295-296.
36Ibid.,
p. 26.
35Ibid., pp. 34,35, 39, 41.
37Tuckness, A.,
34Ibid.,
@ IJTSRD
|
Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD38332
|
Volume – 5 | Issue – 1
|
November-December 2020
Page 1592